Publix Grocery Store Chain Scores A Z...

Publix Grocery Store Chain Scores A Zero on Corporate Equality Index

There are 40 comments on the EDGE story from Jan 22, 2014, titled Publix Grocery Store Chain Scores A Zero on Corporate Equality Index. In it, EDGE reports that:

"Publix claims to be a community focused company," writes Sean Devany, in a letter to the editor of the South Florida Gay News.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#1 Jan 23, 2014
With a deplorable score of ZERO; Publix has sat on its hands on this issue for so long; they have totally lost contact with the mother ship

Publix needs to hire a professional gay rights advisor to guide them through the hoops; if they can find one
.
TODAY!
Dennis in Deltona FL

Deltona, FL

#2 Jan 23, 2014
And I shop a Publics. I think I will have to reconsider shopping there for my family. There is a Winn Dixie just down the road.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#3 Jan 23, 2014
A good hack on them would be to change their signs to read "Pubix."

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#4 Jan 23, 2014
The most disappointing news from the article is that Whole Foods scored lower than Walmart. Before Whole Foods bought Bread and Circus, they were one of the most customer and employee friendly businesses around. They considered their business to be helping make the earth more livable.

John Mackey represents the worst of corporate America: He is completely unconcerned about the welfare of employees. His biggest concerns are his next bonus and lowering his personal taxes.

And it shows if you shop in their stores. Whole Foods management doesn't care about their employees, and the employees don't care about their customers.
island boy

Yulee, FL

#6 Jan 23, 2014
I have ambivalent feelings when it comes to Publix.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#7 Jan 23, 2014
Hopefully they will become more progressive as a company.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#8 Jan 23, 2014
Vacationed with my partner in Florida in '08. We went to a Publix (none here in Seattle), wearing matching tank tops which showed off our matching Japanese kanji tattoos. The Publix checker asked if we were cousins or brothers.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9 Jan 23, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
Vacationed with my partner in Florida in '08. We went to a Publix (none here in Seattle), wearing matching tank tops which showed off our matching Japanese kanji tattoos. The Publix checker asked if we were cousins or brothers.
Obviously not in Ft Lauterdale.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#10 Jan 23, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
Obviously not in Ft Lauterdale.
St. Pete.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#11 Jan 24, 2014
So far as I know we don't have Publix in Missouri. I only shop at Schuncks Markets. My primary reason is that they are unionized. My family have been union members since at least 1944. Unions are now beginning to fight more for their GLBT members, and I am sorry for people who work for companies in Right to Work states. They are, on average, paid less and have no one fighting for their rights. This is just one such example. And before anyone posts anything to me in opposition, let me advise that it is just my opinion, and I won't argue the point. It's just an opinion.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#12 Jan 24, 2014
RalphB wrote:
So far as I know we don't have Publix in Missouri. I only shop at Schuncks Markets. My primary reason is that they are unionized. My family have been union members since at least 1944. Unions are now beginning to fight more for their GLBT members, and I am sorry for people who work for companies in Right to Work states. They are, on average, paid less and have no one fighting for their rights. This is just one such example. And before anyone posts anything to me in opposition, let me advise that it is just my opinion, and I won't argue the point. It's just an opinion.
Unions should be very nervous about the coming case on union funding. In right-to-work states, unions are allowed to charge non-union employees administrative fees for representation in wage negotiations, since the contracts cover both union and non-union workers. Unions are not allowed to charge non-members for general union activities.

This SCOTUS may very well countenance non-union employees freeloading even more on union activism by relieving them of any financial obligation to the union. And if the union abandons the non-union employees in the contract negotiations, they may as well simply decertify.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#13 Jan 24, 2014
RalphB wrote:
So far as I know we don't have Publix in Missouri. I only shop at Schuncks Markets. My primary reason is that they are unionized. My family have been union members since at least 1944. Unions are now beginning to fight more for their GLBT members, and I am sorry for people who work for companies in Right to Work states. They are, on average, paid less and have no one fighting for their rights. This is just one such example. And before anyone posts anything to me in opposition, let me advise that it is just my opinion, and I won't argue the point. It's just an opinion.
Unions are destroying the country. Nearly every city, town and state is deep in the red because of unions. Unions brought the auto industry, the steel industry, the textile industry among others to their knees or worse. Toyota usually has 3 or more models in the top 10 American-Made Index and they aren't union. Look at the "Made in" tags on anything you have and see how much of it was made here. Thank a union.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#14 Jan 24, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
The most disappointing news from the article is that Whole Foods scored lower than Walmart. Before Whole Foods bought Bread and Circus, they were one of the most customer and employee friendly businesses around. They considered their business to be helping make the earth more livable.
John Mackey represents the worst of corporate America: He is completely unconcerned about the welfare of employees. His biggest concerns are his next bonus and lowering his personal taxes.
And it shows if you shop in their stores. Whole Foods management doesn't care about their employees, and the employees don't care about their customers.
The funny thing about the "Great Satan of Bentonville" is that they seem to treat Canadian employees much better than American ones. But then, basic healthcare here is single-payor so not as much of an issue.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#15 Jan 24, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Unions are destroying the country. Nearly every city, town and state is deep in the red because of unions. Unions brought the auto industry, the steel industry, the textile industry among others to their knees or worse. Toyota usually has 3 or more models in the top 10 American-Made Index and they aren't union. Look at the "Made in" tags on anything you have and see how much of it was made here. Thank a union.
And, of course, paying executives tens of millions--or even hundreds of millions--in bonuses has no effect on our competitiveness. You will note that workers' productivity continues to increase and so do corporate profits. But wages have stagnated for the working class, and the lowest-earning workers make LESS than they did in 1980 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) despite being more productive.

The fact is that the upper class has sucked up all the money generated by America's increasingly productive economy. As wages have declined, Americans can no longer afford the products that we produce here.(See Henry Ford and workers' pay.)

Meanwhile, non-unionized workers in Indonesia work in inhumane conditions. Employers lock them into unsafe buildings, and thousands die in fires. We used to have such conditions in the US, but unions put pressure on government and corporations to increase work-place safety.

You, of course, don't give a damn what happens to workers or the earth. As long as you get what you want for a nickel less, screw the rest of the world.

BTW: There's a large body of economic evidence that the US economy would be far more robust if the fruits of productivity were distributed more equitably.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#16 Jan 24, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Unions are destroying the country. Nearly every city, town and state is deep in the red because of unions. Unions brought the auto industry, the steel industry, the textile industry among others to their knees or worse. Toyota usually has 3 or more models in the top 10 American-Made Index and they aren't union. Look at the "Made in" tags on anything you have and see how much of it was made here. Thank a union.
While there are some issues with unions (I know because Canada is highly unionized)- mostly with the fact that they work against meritocracy, they do protect worker's rights. What is really destroying many countries nowadays, especially the US but others as well, is the vast amount of personal wealth stashed away in secret overseas bank accounts. This money is just sitting there and not being pumped back into the economy as capital, salaries, purchases.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#17 Jan 24, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Unions are destroying the country. Nearly every city, town and state is deep in the red because of unions. Unions brought the auto industry, the steel industry, the textile industry among others to their knees or worse. Toyota usually has 3 or more models in the top 10 American-Made Index and they aren't union. Look at the "Made in" tags on anything you have and see how much of it was made here. Thank a union.
Like I said, I won't argue the point with you, or anyone. I've been a member of a union for many years, and I represented my fellow workers in many negotiations. I am still a member, altho a retired one, and continue to pay my union dues. I know the good the unions have done, and I know what it was like before unions. Unions have been losing memberships for many years now. I have full faith in the fact that the pendulum will swing back the other way in the future. You have your opinion, and I have mine. I am happy that I believe in the concept of unionism and fellowship of workers. I don't know what you believe,and frankly, I don't care.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#18 Jan 24, 2014
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
While there are some issues with unions (I know because Canada is highly unionized)- mostly with the fact that they work against meritocracy, they do protect worker's rights.
There is, of course, a great deal of truth in that. With or without unions, however, corporations treat employees as line items on spreadsheets. Jobs are classified and pay grades assigned. Just as in a union shop, individuals progress through jobs and pay grades according to their employer's pleasure.

The unions hurt when work rules prevent the shop from operating efficiently; when workers are protected despite their own failings; and when seniority supersedes the employer's judgment regarding promotion. All of these rules come about, however, as a result of employer abuses, not union avarice.

Understaffing and lack of training can endanger everyone in a work place. My brother gives me good examples of work rules in the movie industry that drive the producers crazy: Every shoot must have a (well-paid) trained fireman on site. Typically, he comes in day after day after day and does nothing. Once in a while, he chastises a worker for creating an unnecessary hazard. But every once in a great while, he saves a shoot. Relying on untrained people to take the initiative and take the right steps would result in loss of property and or lives.

Workers can be sidelined because of personality conflicts or because a boss wants to make room for someone else. Bosses can easily enough make the workplace uncomfortable enough to drive an employee away. Hence the union started supporting workers who were unfairly targeted.

If every problem has a solution, so too does every solution generate new problems. Thus we create bureaucracy to avoid repeating problems that have occurred in the past, and we introduce inefficiency into the work flow. We introduce workplace protections, and we sometimes protect the wrong people.

Ideally, union workers have as much pride and interest in the success of their workplace as any other worker. I have often seen workers support their employer's decision to eliminate workers who aren't pulling their weight. Where unions and management become antagonistic, problems increase exponentially. But we shouldn't pretend that all of the problems are caused by the unions. Management is responsible for a large share of the problems with unions.

And just a reminder: Unions have not destroyed the economy in Germany, which is far more unionized than the US. And manufacturing employees are better paid with better benefits. A big part of the picture is that management accepts that unions are part of their operating environment. They seek to work with them, not to dominate or eliminate them.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#19 Jan 24, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
There is, of course, a great deal of truth in that....
Of course, I fully agree with you. I just wanted to make sure that we, unlike the original poster, do not see everything in black and white. Also, if workers are less capable, it is not the fault of the union that they are so - it is the fault of the employer for hiring them or if the employer cannot find anyone else even at good wages, then something is amiss with the educational system and or demographics where the employer is located.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#20 Jan 25, 2014
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, I fully agree with you. I just wanted to make sure that we, unlike the original poster, do not see everything in black and white. Also, if workers are less capable, it is not the fault of the union that they are so - it is the fault of the employer for hiring them or if the employer cannot find anyone else even at good wages, then something is amiss with the educational system and or demographics where the employer is located.
I suppose your phrase of "original poster" refers to me. Yes, I agree. Some unions have silly, obstructive rules. I once knew plumber on a job site that could not drill a hole through which to run a pipe. They said he needed a carpenter to drill that hole, even though it would require him to come in on a guaranteed four hour overtime basis to drill a hole of one inch in diameter. I do not claim that unions are perfect, and I do believe some limits are needed. However, if anyone studies history regarding these issues, they would probably be convinced of the need of unions.

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#21 Jan 25, 2014
Publicks Grocery Store.........ROTFL!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Kentucky clerk defies order, refuses to issue s... 3 min tat tvam asi 743
News Judge jails Kentucky clerk for refusing marriag... 5 min Responsibility 316
News Judge, clerk in marriage case dealt with nepoti... 7 min Frankie Rizzo 19
Will NE Jade Mow HER Meadow Twoday? 14 min Jerry1 1
News 4 GOP candidates sign anti-gay marriage pledge 16 min DebraE 401
News Mike Huckabee says Hillary Clinton should go to... 33 min Synque 68
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 34 min Mr_Seinnep 3,712
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 51 min Respect7l 26,032
More from around the web